ORDER : PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J. 04.04.2025 Heard Mr. M.Z. Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned Amicus Curiae representing the private respondent. 2. This an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the criminal proceedings of the Special (P) Case No.216/2024 arising out of South Salmara P.S. Case No.32/2023 pending in the court of learned Special Judge, South Salmara, Mankachar. 3. The Respondent No.2 who is not a relative of the petitioners, had lodged an FIR before police that the petitioner Mostafizur Rahman had married the other petitioner who was below 18 years of age. Police registered the case under the provisions of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and under the POCSO Act. 4. Now, the boy and the girl have jointly filed this application stating that they had married to each other pursuant to their love-affair. By this time, they are blessed with a son also. They claim to be living happily. Lit may be stated that at the time of her marriage, the girl was below 18 years of age but she is now more than 18 years of age. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 6. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC (now Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 ) has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604 . Paragraphs 102 and 103 of the judgment read as under: “ 102. 6. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC (now Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 ) has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604 . Paragraphs 102 and 103 of the judgment read as under: “ 102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. 103. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.” 7. Coming back the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances, there is no possibility of conviction in future. So, allowing such a criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. 8. This is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. 9. The criminal petition is allowed. The the criminal proceedings of the Special (P) Case No.216/2024 arising out of South Salmara P.S. Case No.32/2023 pending in the court of learned Special Judge, South Salmara, Mankachar, are quashed and set aside. With the aforesaid direction, the Criminal Petition stands disposed of.